[Development] Subject: Re: Proposing CMake as build tool for Qt 6

[Riitta-Leena Miettinen]

Hello Kavindra,

There is a bug report about improving the Qt CMake documentation, where we are collecting ideas: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-72159

Please add your questions and concerns there.

Cheers,

Leena


Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 14:08:56 +0000
From: "Palaraja, Kavindra" <KPalaraja at luxoft.com>
To: "development at qt-project.org" <development at qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Development] Proposing CMake as build tool for Qt 6
Message-ID: <716BC4FD-5E4E-47D3-A8E1-B22ED3DEC5A2 at luxoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

That's good to hear. I understand that there will be two levels of documentation:

- CMake itself on their side
- Qt's CMake related content; like the macros you mention

Regarding the possibly-internal bits, I would vote for having them documented still -- even if there's a note or a disclaimer explaining their status. This is a good way for your team to maintain the messaging; instead of having random blog posts circulating online about people's experiments on these internal macros. Those would then deviate from the official messaging. Additionally, I believe some of my colleagues, who are module maintainers outside of The Qt Company, could use this information.

Sure, I'll try to help with reviews when I have some time.

Thanks for your response,
Kavindra.

On 06.06.19, 16:00, "Kai Köhne" <Kai.Koehne at qt.io> wrote:



    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> On Behalf Of
    > Palaraja, Kavindra
    > Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 3:38 PM
    > To: development at qt-project.org
    > Subject: Re: [Development] Proposing CMake as build tool for Qt 6
    >
    > Hi,
    >
    > Just curious, do you have a link to what the draft documentation for CMake
    > looks like?

    CMake has quite extensive documentation: https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/

    > qmake's documentation has always been an afterthought. The documentation
    > equivalent for CMake should be better than that – at the very least, it
    > shouldn’t result in another https://wiki.qt.io/Undocumented_QMake and
    > such.

    I think this is the case 😊 We're also gradually improving the documentation of CMake macros that Qt provides, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/topic:%22cmake_transition%22 (reviews welcome btw).

    Now there will still be CMake macros & functions that are only used when building Qt itself (-> are internal). I don't think it makes sense yet to document them, because they're still in flux. But once things stabilize it would be IMO a good move to at least provide overview documentation.

    Regards

    Kai

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20190606/b9a5a062/attachment.html>